No. Wrong. From the perspective of the parents, do they go to "prenatal check-ups?

" Yes. I know you call your self Doctor fate, but really... You are demonstrating your ignorance. Here's what you get when you google "pre-natal check up".

You're demonstrating you're a jackass. I've added bold to help you understand your "refutation" is not a refutation because you are comparing "parents" to "google." How many human babies has Google had?

The only thing you're expert at is acting like a fool. You are second to none.

Ray Jay wrote:The real difference between the parties is success. The Republicans used the rules to their advantage (which appeals to the hard core) and were successful (which appeals to the rest of the party). They look good to their base and they delivered. The Democrats are using the rules to their advantage but will be unsuccessful. That may appeal to the base, but it does not garner respect among anyone else. It's not a winning formula. It's better to win graciously than petulantly (neither party). It's better to win petulantly than to lose graciously (Republicans). It's better to lose graciously than to lose petulantly. It's worst to lose petulantly (Democrats).

Isn't this just a reverse of the positions a few years ago? Mitch McConnell was "Mr Filibuster" after all, and lost petulantly then. In the short term, it did not work, but today, it's all forgotten. In four years' time, a different dynamic will likely be in play.

In the trucker case there was differences among the justices in interpreting a statute and what it meant (they even used different dictionary definitions of what the word "operate" means"), Here is an interesting article about how courts go about interpreting ambiguities in statutes.